Ajay Kumar vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW

¶2

CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 2713 of 2024

Ajay Kumar

.....Applicant(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home And Another

¶7

	.....Opposite Party(s)
Counsel for Applicant(s)	: Sarvesh Tripathi, Sheo Mani Tripathi, Vijay Pathak
Counsel for Opposite Party(s)	: G.A., Anurag Singh, Ashwani Kumar Singh
Court No.- 23

¶8

HON'BLE RAJEEV BHARTI, J.

¶9

As per the office report, notice to opposite party no.2/complainant has been served, but none appears on his behalf.

¶10

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material placed on record.

¶11

The present application under Section 438 Cr.P.C./482 B.N.S.S. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No.92 of 2015, under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C., Police Station- Sammanpur, District- Ambedkar Nagar.

¶12

The Co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 11.12.2024 has passed the following order while granting interim anticipatory bail to the applicant:-

¶13

"The present bail application has been filed by the applicant under Section 438 Cr.P.C. apprehending his arrest in Case Crime 92/2015, under Sections 419/420/467/468/471 1.P.C., P.S. Sammanpur, District Ambedkar Nagar.

¶14

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

¶15

The prosecution case is that earlier in the year 1989, an agreement to sell was executed by co-accused Balli in favour of the informant. The informant took the possession on that land and thereafter the co-accused Balli filed a civil suit which was decided in favour of the informant on 14.03.1996. It is alleged that despite knowing the fact that co-accused Balli is not the owner of the land, by forging the papers, a sale deed has been executed by co-accused Balli in favour of the co-accused Ajay Kumar in which the present applicant is a witness.

¶16

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that allegation in the prosecution case is that co-accused Balli has executed a sale deed by committing forgery. It has been further submitted that the applicant is a bonafide purchaser. He had no knowledge that the alleged land belongs

¶17

ABAIL No. 2713 of 2024

¶18

2

¶19

to the informant. He has purchased the said land relying on the entry in the revenue record which is on record with the bail application. Charge sheet in the matter has been filed. The applicant has cooperated in the investigation and further undertakes to cooperate in the trial. Co-accused Dhirendra Pratap Singh @ Pintu Singh who was also a marginal witness has filed anticipatory bail application No. 42 of 2023 which has been allowed vide order dated 10.01.2023. The applicant has explained criminal history of one case in the bail application.

¶20

Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the complainant have vehemently opposed the bail application, however, could not dispute the fact that charge-sheet in the matter has been filed.

¶21

Issue notice to opposite party no. 2.

¶22

List on 09.01.2025.

¶23

Pleadings to be completed in the meantime.

¶24

On due consideration to the fact that the offences are triable by magistrate; the applicant is a bonafide purchaser and the co- accused has been granted anticipatory bail; he has cooperated in the investigation and further undertakes to cooperate in the trial, It would be expedient in the interest of justice that the liberty of the applicant may be protected in view of dictum of Apex Court In re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.

¶25

In view of the above, since, charge-sheet in the matter has been filed, the accused applicant is directed to surrender before trial court, if he is summoned to face trial for offence in question. The accused applicant shall be released on bail by the trial court on his furnishing a personal bond and two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶26

(1) The applicant shall not, directly or indirectly make any Inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or tamper with the evidence;

¶27

(ii) The applicant shall not leave India without the previous permission of the court;

¶28

(iii) The applicant shall not pressurize/ intimidate the prosecution witness;

¶29

(iv)The applicant shall appear before the trial court on each date fixed unless personal presence is exempted;

¶30

(v) In case of breach of any of the above conditions the court below shall have the liberty to cancel the bail;

¶31

Any other reasonable restrictions/conditions which the trial court may deem fit and proper can be imposed."

¶32

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has been released on interim anticipatory bail after filing of the personal bonds and two sureties before the investigating officer. He has duly cooperated in the investigation. Charge sheet in this case has already been filed. He has not misused the liberty of interim anticipatory bail granted by the Court. He further submits that the applicant has criminal history of one case in which he has been released on anticipatory bail, specific averment in this regard

¶33

ABAIL No. 2713 of 2024

¶34

3

¶35

has been made in para no.21 of the application. He undertakes to further cooperate in the investigation as well as in the trial and in case, he is enlarged on anticipatory bail, he shall not misuse the liberty of same.

¶36

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail but could not dispute the aforesaid facts as argued by the learned counsel for the applicant.

¶37

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case and considering the nature of accusation and the fact that the applicant is having criminal history of one case in which he has been granted anticipatory bail, he has not misused the liberty of interim anticipatory bail granted by the Court coupled with the undertaking given by the applicant that he will further cooperate in the investigation as well as in the trial, the interim protection granted by a coordinate bench of this Court vide order dated 11.12.2024 is made absolute in view of dictum of Apex Court in re: Sushila Aggarwal Vs. State (NCT of Delhi)-2020 SCC online SC 98.

¶38

In view of the aforesaid, the anticipatory bail application is allowed .

¶39

February 24, 2026

¶40

Anand/-

¶41

(Rajeev Bharti,J.)

¶42

Digitally signed by :- ANAND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Ajay Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ajay Kumar v. State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Mohd. Shamim @ Mohd. Shameem vs State of U.P. Thru. Its Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and Another

Sapna Singh vs State of U.P. Thur. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko and 2 Others

Mohammad Jabir Alias Munna vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. and Another

Vikas vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko. and 4 Others

Rishu vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko.

Indra Prakash Pandey vs State of U.P. Thru Prin.Secy.Home Lucknow